| Literature DB >> 35036398 |
Fan Liu1, Gen Li2, Ying Zhou2, Yinghui Ma2, Tao Wang2.
Abstract
In order to strengthen the construction of China's health industry and improve the health of the people, based on the data of 31 provinces and cities in China from 2009 to 2019, the improved EBM model is used to measure the health production efficiency of each region, and Moran index is used to study the Spatio-temporal variation of health production efficiency of each province. Finally, the spatial econometric model is applied to study the influencing factors of the Spatio-temporal variation of health production efficiency. The results show that generally speaking, the average efficiency of 31 provinces and cities is above 0.7, and the average efficiency of some regions is above 1. From the perspective of time variation, the average efficiency value in the eastern region and the middle region increases from 0.816 to 0.882 and from 0.851 to 0.861, respectively. However, the average efficiency value in the western region and northeast region decreases from 0.861 to 0.83 and from 0.864 to 0.805, respectively. From the perspective of spatial distribution, HH agglomeration and LL agglomeration exist in most regions. By comparing Moran scatter plots in 2009 and 2019, it is found that the quadrants of most regions remain unchanged, and LL agglomeration is the main agglomeration type in local space. There is a significant spatial dependence among different regions. From the perspective of spatial empirical results, Pgdp, Med, and Pd have a positive effect on health production efficiency. The direct effect and indirect effect of Pgdp, Med, and Gov all pass the significance test of 1%, indicating that there are spatial spillover effects of the three indicators. Each region should reasonably deal with the spillover effect of surrounding regions, vigorously develop economic activities, carry out cooperation with surrounding regions and apply demonstration effect to accelerate the development of overall health production.Entities:
Keywords: Moran's I; Spatio-temporal variation; health production efficiency; improved EBM model; spatial econometric model
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 35036398 PMCID: PMC8758563 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.792590
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Public Health ISSN: 2296-2565
Variable description.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Expected output |
| Perinatal survival rate (‰) |
| Capital investment |
| Total expenditure on health (million yuan, Ln, based on 2009) |
|
| Per capita medical insurance (ten thousand yuan, based on 2009) | |
|
| Number of beds in medical and Health institutions per thousand population (sheets) | |
| Human input |
| Number of health technicians per thousand population (persons, Ln) |
| Unexpected output |
| Medical waste production amount (ten thousand tons) |
|
| Mortality rate (%) | |
| Per capita GDP |
| GDP/Population by region (ten thousand Yuan/person, based on 2009) |
| Urbanization level |
| Urbanization level (%) |
| Service level of medical institutions |
| Average length of stay in hospital (days) |
| Medical non-marketization |
| Number of public/Private hospital establishments (%) |
| Government support system |
| Fiscal health expenditure /GDP (%) |
| Population density |
| Area population/Area (People/km2) |
Descriptive statistics of variables.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perinatal survival rate (‰) | 0.760 | 0.982 | 0.034 | 0.936 |
| Total expenditure on health (million yuan, Ln, based on 2009) | 3.519 | 8.662 | 0.903 | 6.789 |
| Per capita medical insurance (ten thousand yuan, based on 2009) | 0.044 | 0.598 | 0.101 | 0.225 |
| Number of beds in medical and Health institutions per 1,000 population (sheets) | 2.390 | 7.550 | 1.192 | 4.871 |
| Number of health technicians per thousand population (persons, Ln) | 2.370 | 15.460 | 2.027 | 5.794 |
| Medical waste production amount (ten thousand tons) | 0.050 | 1046.04 | 173.690 | 140.849 |
| Mortality rate (%) | 0.042 | 0.076 | 0.008 | 0.060 |
| per capita GDP (ten thousand Yuan/person, based on 2009) | 1.1062 | 16.1642 | 2.561 | 4.832 |
| Urbanization level (%) | 0.223 | 0.896 | 0.136 | 0.555 |
| Service level of medical institutions (days) | 8.1 | 16.2 | 2.401 | 9.923 |
| Degree of medical non-marketization (%) | 0.1976 | 32.000 | 2.7254 | 1.4347 |
| Government support system (%) | 0.0074 | 0.0753 | 0.0119 | 0.0213 |
| Population density(People/km2) | 2.4104 | 3853.9683 | 683.6284 | 450.4962 |
Health production efficiency in China 2009-2019.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BeiJing | 1.017 | 1.027 | 1.026 | 1.012 | 1.009 | 1.008 | 1.000 | 1.012 | 1.005 | 0.752 | 0.728 | 1.027 | 0.728 | 0.963 | Eastern |
| TianJin | 0.696 | 0.707 | 0.695 | 0.758 | 0.750 | 0.787 | 1.004 | 1.003 | 1.014 | 1.010 | 1.022 | 1.022 | 0.695 | 0.859 | Eastern |
| HeBei | 0.744 | 0.763 | 0.779 | 0.846 | 0.831 | 0.899 | 1.000 | 0.889 | 0.849 | 0.835 | 0.838 | 1.000 | 0.744 | 0.843 | Eastern |
| GuangDong | 1.019 | 1.030 | 1.034 | 1.024 | 1.027 | 1.027 | 1.037 | 1.037 | 1.036 | 1.032 | 1.031 | 1.037 | 1.019 | 1.030 | Eastern |
| HaiNan | 1.074 | 1.114 | 1.107 | 1.092 | 1.066 | 1.081 | 1.080 | 1.099 | 1.097 | 1.093 | 1.090 | 1.114 | 1.066 | 1.090 | Eastern |
| ShangHai | 0.655 | 0.816 | 0.747 | 0.787 | 0.758 | 0.820 | 0.872 | 1.004 | 0.904 | 0.830 | 0.765 | 1.004 | 0.655 | 0.814 | Eastern |
| JiangSu | 0.687 | 0.708 | 0.708 | 0.743 | 0.730 | 0.780 | 0.789 | 0.778 | 0.773 | 0.804 | 0.845 | 0.845 | 0.687 | 0.758 | Eastern |
| ZheJiang | 0.748 | 0.768 | 0.781 | 0.803 | 0.790 | 0.804 | 0.812 | 0.807 | 0.804 | 0.804 | 0.797 | 0.812 | 0.748 | 0.793 | Eastern |
| FuJian | 0.822 | 1.012 | 1.006 | 0.943 | 0.807 | 0.833 | 0.903 | 0.876 | 0.893 | 0.893 | 0.978 | 1.012 | 0.807 | 0.906 | Eastern |
| ShanDong | 0.706 | 0.717 | 0.705 | 0.710 | 0.734 | 0.724 | 0.738 | 0.727 | 0.715 | 0.725 | 0.723 | 0.738 | 0.705 | 0.720 | Eastern |
| ShanXi | 0.735 | 0.846 | 0.780 | 0.789 | 0.801 | 0.788 | 0.887 | 0.868 | 0.879 | 0.892 | 0.819 | 0.892 | 0.735 | 0.826 | Middle |
| AnHui | 1.002 | 1.008 | 1.008 | 0.975 | 1.008 | 1.004 | 1.002 | 1.002 | 1.003 | 1.008 | 1.013 | 1.013 | 0.975 | 1.003 | Middle |
| JiangXi | 1.073 | 1.032 | 1.044 | 1.028 | 1.024 | 1.025 | 1.020 | 1.023 | 1.011 | 1.008 | 1.004 | 1.073 | 1.004 | 1.027 | Middle |
| HeNan | 0.808 | 0.853 | 0.846 | 0.845 | 0.876 | 0.832 | 0.862 | 0.878 | 1.003 | 1.007 | 0.807 | 1.007 | 0.807 | 0.874 | Middle |
| HuBei | 0.761 | 0.824 | 0.830 | 0.805 | 0.804 | 0.758 | 0.798 | 0.760 | 0.753 | 0.763 | 0.783 | 0.830 | 0.753 | 0.785 | Middle |
| HuNan | 0.730 | 0.751 | 0.747 | 0.758 | 0.761 | 0.755 | 0.768 | 0.752 | 0.757 | 0.765 | 0.743 | 0.768 | 0.730 | 0.753 | Middle |
| GuangXi | 0.866 | 1.001 | 0.891 | 0.798 | 0.804 | 0.784 | 0.810 | 0.809 | 0.806 | 0.820 | 0.810 | 1.001 | 0.784 | 0.836 | Western |
| ChongQing | 1.005 | 0.822 | 0.838 | 0.825 | 0.872 | 0.812 | 0.830 | 0.790 | 0.780 | 0.760 | 0.751 | 1.005 | 0.751 | 0.826 | Western |
| SiChuan | 0.745 | 0.740 | 0.741 | 0.741 | 0.815 | 0.740 | 0.776 | 0.754 | 0.761 | 0.766 | 0.763 | 0.815 | 0.740 | 0.758 | Western |
| GuiZhou | 1.028 | 1.029 | 1.025 | 1.007 | 1.010 | 0.865 | 0.875 | 0.838 | 0.788 | 0.771 | 0.761 | 1.029 | 0.761 | 0.909 | Western |
| YunNan | 0.758 | 0.758 | 0.748 | 1.002 | 0.770 | 0.777 | 0.784 | 0.768 | 0.773 | 0.785 | 0.764 | 1.002 | 0.748 | 0.790 | Western |
| XiZang | 1.132 | 1.120 | 1.143 | 1.161 | 1.185 | 1.189 | 1.193 | 1.193 | 1.190 | 1.170 | 1.160 | 1.193 | 1.120 | 1.167 | Western |
| ShaanXi | 0.752 | 0.767 | 0.786 | 0.791 | 0.779 | 0.765 | 0.773 | 0.762 | 0.757 | 0.748 | 0.761 | 0.791 | 0.748 | 0.767 | Western |
| GanSu | 0.775 | 0.786 | 0.857 | 0.857 | 0.877 | 0.838 | 0.888 | 0.855 | 0.845 | 0.827 | 0.787 | 0.888 | 0.775 | 0.836 | Western |
| QingHai | 0.821 | 1.002 | 0.797 | 1.001 | 0.752 | 0.772 | 0.782 | 0.793 | 0.777 | 0.780 | 0.785 | 1.002 | 0.752 | 0.824 | Western |
| NingXia | 1.021 | 1.007 | 1.016 | 1.022 | 1.028 | 1.027 | 1.023 | 1.016 | 1.012 | 0.806 | 0.821 | 1.028 | 0.806 | 0.982 | Western |
| XinJiang | 0.697 | 0.676 | 0.731 | 0.741 | 0.713 | 0.722 | 0.749 | 0.812 | 0.833 | 0.860 | 1.001 | 1.001 | 0.676 | 0.776 | Western |
| NeiMengGu | 0.742 | 0.785 | 0.790 | 0.785 | 0.771 | 0.770 | 0.812 | 0.802 | 0.789 | 0.771 | 0.799 | 0.812 | 0.742 | 0.783 | Western |
| LiaoNing | 0.782 | 0.693 | 0.715 | 0.735 | 0.742 | 0.752 | 0.780 | 0.753 | 0.755 | 0.744 | 0.762 | 0.782 | 0.693 | 0.747 | Northeastern |
| JiLin | 1.007 | 0.749 | 0.808 | 0.892 | 0.959 | 0.794 | 0.910 | 0.838 | 0.815 | 0.796 | 0.798 | 1.007 | 0.749 | 0.852 | Northeastern |
| HeiLongJiang | 0.802 | 1.008 | 0.801 | 0.786 | 0.771 | 0.778 | 0.832 | 0.825 | 0.816 | 0.851 | 0.855 | 1.008 | 0.771 | 0.830 | Northeastern |
Figure 1Health production efficiencies of National and four regions from 2009 to 2019.
Figure 2Breakdown of health production efficiency from 2009 to 2019.
Figure 3Distribution of health production efficiencies in 31 provinces and cities in China. (A) Distribution of health production efficiencies in 2010. (B) Distribution of health production efficiencies in 2013. (C) Distribution of health production efficiencies in 2016. (D) Distribution of health production efficiencies in 2019.
Global Moran index of health production efficiency from 2009 to 2019.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 0.152 | 1.370 | 0.037 |
| 2010 | 0.106 | 1.169 | 0.041 |
| 2011 | 0.091 | 1.460 | 0.035 |
| 2012 | 0.108 | 1.630 | 0.029 |
| 2013 | 0.161 | 1.007 | 0.016 |
| 2014 | 0.147 | 1.099 | 0.049 |
| 2015 | 0.119 | 1.096 | 0.045 |
| 2016 | 0.145 | 1.591 | 0.025 |
| 2017 | 0.117 | 1.153 | 0.013 |
| 2018 | 0.183 | 1.702 | 0.062 |
| 2019 | 0.186 | 1.878 | 0.040 |
Figure 4Local Moran scatter plots in 2009 and 2019.
Panel unit root inspection results.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.8762 | −4.6248 | 0.0000 |
|
| 0.4892 | −19.0797 | 0.0000 |
|
| −0.0078 | −37.6424 | 0.0000 |
|
| 0.6321 | −13.7406 | 0.0000 |
|
| 0.4001 | −22.4070 | 0.0000 |
|
| 0.5160 | −18.0766 | 0.0000 |
Test values of LM test statistics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 123.585*** | 119.061*** | 8.216** | 3.693* | |
| 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.004 | 0.055 |
*Means significant at the 10% level.
**Means significant at the 5% level.
***Means significant at the 1% level.
LR test and Wald test results.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| LR | 83.41*** | 91.47*** |
| 0.000 | 0.000 | |
| Wald | 49.97*** | 38.85*** |
| 0.000 | 0.000 |
***Represents significant at 1% level.
Regression results of SDM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.021*** | 0.046*** | ||
| (0.00) | (0.00) | |||
|
| −0.694*** | −0.605** | ||
| (0.00) | (0.05) | |||
|
| −0.028*** | −0.037** | ||
| (0.00) | (0.01) | |||
|
| −0.001** | −0.006* | ||
| (0.05) | (0.08) | |||
|
| 3.339*** | 7.787*** | ||
| (0.00) | (0.00) | |||
|
| 0.890*** | −0.718* | ||
| (0.00) | (0.06) | |||
| rho | 0.074 | |||
| (0.32) | ||||
| sigma2_ | 0.003*** | |||
| (0.00) | ||||
| R-squared | 0.111 | 0.111 | 0.111 | 0.111 |
*Represents significant at 10% level.
**Represents significant at 5% level.
***Represents significant at 1% level.
Effect decomposition results of SDM.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| −0.0148*** | 0.0255*** | 0.0107*** |
|
| −0.7887*** | 0.1863 | −0.6024*** |
|
| −0.0289*** | −0.0715*** | −0.1004*** |
|
| −0.0010* | −0.0016 | −0.0026*** |
|
| 6.9213*** | −3.2741*** | 3.6472*** |
|
| 0.0020 | 0.0057 | 0.0077*** |
*Represents significant at 10% level.
***Represents significant at 1% level.